Chris
@multiplicityct.bsky.social
4.3K followers 1.2K following 3.1K posts
PhD student in philosophy at the University of Staffordshire. Heidegger, analytic ethics (trust and mistrust), philosophy of tech/AI. Marylander. MA Staffs, MBA Duke. Wittgenstein and Cantor handshake numbers = 3 (via John Conway).
Posts Media Videos Starter Packs
multiplicityct.bsky.social
Writing requires reading, and *reading* requires fairly intensive writing. I love what @vcarchidi.bsky.social has done here. It tracks with how I grew and changed during my MA. If I "read" in a meaningful sense, it means I've reconstructed the author's argument in my notes & linked them.
multiplicityct.bsky.social
The blurb from John Fowles was an anti-recommendation, which I happily ignored. The Magus is still the worst book I've ever read.
multiplicityct.bsky.social
Just started this last night, and it's really entertaining so far...
valancourtbooks.bsky.social
Today's $2.99 Kindle deal! A mouth-watering blend of delicious black humor and Kafkaesque horror story, THE COOK (1965) is a dark fable "beginning in a vein of innocent fairy tale and ending with satanic revels" (The Observer). www.amazon.com/Cook-Valanco...
Book cover for THE COOK by Harry Kressing
multiplicityct.bsky.social
This looks interesting...
clpskuleuven.bsky.social
Is our world driven by technology—and is #technology itself neutral? Is #AI really disruptive? A new book by @lodelauwaert.bsky.social & Bartek Chomanski examines technologies from hammers & drills to autonomous cars & ChatGPT 🤖👇 link.springer.com/book/10.1007... #philsky #philtech #HPS
Book cover of "We, Robots: Questioning the Neutrality of Technology, Ethical AI and Technological Determinism" by Lode Lauwaert and Bartek Chomanski, published by Springer. The design features large white and dark blue text on a bright orange background.
multiplicityct.bsky.social
There are three or four songs from "Life of a Showgirl" that I can't get out of my head since this weekend.

Lots of negativity from the critics, but I'll admit, one of my all-time favorite songs is Joe Diffie's "Pickup Man". Not every banger needs to be Nobel Prize-worthy writing.
multiplicityct.bsky.social
It turns out that talented practitioners of X are not necessarily talented philosophers of X, for any given X.
emollick.bsky.social
This is an interesting debate about AI stories between an OpenAI researcher who works on AI writing and one of the greatest living short story writers.

Now that we have machines that can write novel stories, and increasingly very good or moving stories, we need to think more about what that means.
multiplicityct.bsky.social
Those are narrow conditions, which lots of human persons don’t satisfy. But yes, I think there has to be a setting-aside of traditional philosophical intuitions to make sense of these things. They’re not “mere” objects even though they are also not persons. Not sure they’re even on that continuum.
multiplicityct.bsky.social
That is an interesting point. Though they do “command” incredible (compute) resources & will begin to “control” physical objects. Interesting analysis to be done there along the lines of possession is 9/10s of the law.
multiplicityct.bsky.social
Yes. There's an analogous problem in phil of trust literature, which tries to distinguish trust from reliance via Strawson's participant stance (or epistemic warrants).

I think we take the participant stance towards lots of non-agents, contrary to philosophers' intuition. Hence Eliza & bot romance.
multiplicityct.bsky.social
Agreed.

And have no fear about the better toolkits, that's my dissertation topic so you only have to wait ~5 more years to get one!
multiplicityct.bsky.social
That is Joanna Bryson's stance, too, or was as of "Robots Should Be Slaves" a number of years ago.

I'm a (descriptive) free-marketer, I think folks are mostly going to build what excites them. So I think we need better toolkits for how these things actually show up phenomenologically in our worlds.
multiplicityct.bsky.social
Interesting thread. I think the personhood question is important, even if the answer remains “robots are not persons” for a long time. It’s because chatbots are so tempting to see *as* persons. We might reject personhood if we think about it for a minute — but we’ll often not think about it & act.
tedunderwood.com
Yeah. I can see these lines getting blurry in the future. But I think we have 20 years of “AI as normal technology.” (Not counting on any technical barrier, just social inertia.)

The thing is, though, that people are gonna be talking about personhood the whole time because we’re so primed for it.
multiplicityct.bsky.social
Feels like this tracks the mood in my extremely Swiftie house. The LP arrives here tomorrow & we’re streaming it right now.
multiplicityct.bsky.social
Morality must be about more than obligation, contract and incentives. Our moral theories need trust and love. Parents and carers are the key locus for positive morality -- and where things go wrong in coercive moral theories.

There is so much going on in this paragraph by Annette Baier! #philsky
"Undoubtedly some important part of morality does depend in part on a system of threats and bribes, at least for its survival in difficult conditions when normal goodwill and normally virtuous dispositions may be insufficient to motivate the conduct required for the preservation and justice of the moral network of relationships. But equally undoubtedly life will be nasty, emotionally poor, and worse that brutish (even if longer), if that is all morality is, or even if that coercive structure of morality is regarded as the backbone, rather than as an available crutch, should the main support fail. For the main support has to come from those we entrust with the job of rearing and training persons so that they can be trusted in various ways, some trusted with extraordinary coercive powers, some with public decision-making powers, all trusted as parties to promise, most trusted by some who love them and by one or more willing to become co-parents with them, most trusted by dependent children, dependent elderly relatives, sick friends, and so on. A very complex network of a great variety of sorts of trust structures our moral relationships with our fellows, and if there is a *main* support to this network it is the trust we place in those who respond to the trust of new members of the moral community, namely to children, and prepare them for new forms of trust." - Annette Baier, "What Do Women Want in a Moral Theory?" 1985
multiplicityct.bsky.social
Not a direct answer to your question, but I find @doctorspurt.bsky.social's work on oppressive affective technologies really helpful for thinking about this. His paper in Topoi on this is sharp, and he has a great line about cigarettes being potentially the most successful affective tech in history.
multiplicityct.bsky.social
What’s your view? I’ve been a longstanding Claude-preferrer but use both. Now I’m gravitating towards GPT.
Reposted by Chris
duhe.bsky.social
Jane Goodall insisted the giving names to the chimps and realizing that they had personalities was critical for doing science. It was a critical methodological debate and she was entirely correct (and won). #philsci legend in addition to everything else.
multiplicityct.bsky.social
We have nothing to worry about from AI's hyper-persuasiveness...as long as we're truly masters of our own beliefs, the claims of social epistemology are wrong, and we can fully understand how & why models are influencing us. In other words, it's an issue. Great new @rbnmckenna.bsky.social article.
Robin McKenna, Sophistry on Steroids? The Ethics, Epistemology and Politics of Persuasive AI - PhilPapers
This paper examines the ethical, epistemological, and political implications of persuasive AI technologies. Recent research suggests that AI is roughly as persuasive as humans in many contexts. Should...
philpapers.org
multiplicityct.bsky.social
I read this while writing my PhD proposal last year, it’s really good!
multiplicityct.bsky.social
The most recent one by Lucy O’Brien on Duddington and the problem of other minds is great so far. That was my commute listen last night. :-)
multiplicityct.bsky.social
ChatGPT with Pulse, by comparison, seems really light on its feet. I wonder if we're seeing a split between prosumer/coding-focused Claude and a more consumer oriented ChatGPT. I'm 100% talking about the websites/apps here rather than API.